Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8723bs: rtw_mlme: Remove
 unnecessary conditions
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>,
        Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
Cc:     Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel23498@gmail.com>,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com,
        daniel.baluta@gmail.com, hverkuil@xs4all.nl,
        Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net
References: <20200311135859.5626-1-shreeya.patel23498@gmail.com>
 <61a6c3d7-6592-b57b-6466-995309302cc2@linux.microsoft.com>
 <20200312113416.23d3db5c@elisabeth>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.2003121145540.2418@hadrien>
From:   Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <b5daea1c-8172-93b6-0956-b31c3798d373@linux.microsoft.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:31:33 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2003121145540.2418@hadrien>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 3/12/2020 3:49 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:

Thanks for your input Julia and Stefano.

>> That's my general preference as well, but I can't find any point in the
>> "Describe your changes" section of submitting-patches.rst actually
>> defining the order. I wouldn't imply that from the sequence the steps
>> are presented in.
>>
>> In case it's possible to say everything with a single statement as
>> Shreeya did here, though, I guess that becomes rather a linguistic
>> factor, and I personally prefer the concise version here.
> 
> https://kernelnewbies.org/PatchPhilosophy suggests:
> 
> In patch descriptions and in the subject, it is common and preferable to
> use present-tense, imperative language. Write as if you are telling git
> what to do with your patch.

Use of imperative language is the approach I was thinking as well.

thanks,
  -lakshmi